Can They Handle The Truth?

There is a bit of a storm brewing at the moment in Ireland with regard to the forthcoming report on Child abuse in the diocese of Raphoe.  The Church's own investigative organisation and the HSE are due to release their findings into the way the diocese dealt with accusations. 

A report in the Irish Independent claims that the reports will reveal that hundreds of children were abused by priests.  The bishop of Raphoe, Dr Philip Boyce has refuted the newspaper's claims as exaggerated, and, as expected, he is being condemned from the heights by the usual suspects who have now suddenly rediscovered their voices after their temporary bout of chronic laryngitis around the time of the revelations about Senator David Norris.  Reading some reactions to his intervention I see one person dismisses the bishop and tells us that the Church is constantly trying to hide the truth.  Interesting.....

I do not know what is in the reports, we will have to wait and see.  If Bishop Boyce is incorrect and hundreds were abused he has certainly made himself a hostage to fortune, but then he could also be correct. We cannot, however, presume he is lying.  The question of truth, however, is very topical.  But I would like to ask of our liberal secularists and anti-Church critics what they mean by truth?  As Pilate said to the Lord: "Truth? What is that?" 

I ask this because it is almost certain that their definition of truth is not that which is found in the Oxford English Dictionary which is the definition the Church tends to go along with.  You see if it was then the secular media would not be making a distinction between child abuse by priests and child abuse by others.  If it was then the celebrity would get the same grilling as the priest and those who protect abusers regardless of who they are or their sexual orientation would all be treated the same.  But that is not the way it seems.  If you are a celebrity, a liberal or gay there is another set of rules for you, there are lots and lots of excuses which will be offered for your behaviour, or if they can't come up with any, then they just won't cover the story and try to kill it. 

In response to this I have other questions: what about the victims?   Is the victim of a non-clerical abuser somehow less important?  Is their pain and suffering not enough to spark a rage?  I try to imagine (though to be honest I cannot because it has not happened to me and I dare not presume to undermine their suffering by pretending to understand) how these victims feel when the media excuse or cover up their abusers or even defend them?  Or when they interview these abusers with the deepest respect and understanding and treat them as if they were the victims of right-wing conservatives?  How do these victims feel when their abusers court national sympathy as "victims of homophobia" and those who protect them are considered fit to hold the highest office in the land? 

It seems to me that, for all their pontificating about the Catholic Church and truth, the liberal secularists and Irish media need to listen to their own diatribe and implement it themselves.  In this sordid affair of child abuse, truth is the last thing they are interested in.

In relation to this, this is a deeply disturbing story emerging from Hollywood with regard to paedophilia.  Corey Feldman, a former child star, has spoken about the prevalence of paedophilia in the film industry and seems to suggest that the tragic suicide of fellow actor Corey Haim was related to his being abused by people in the industry. 

Criminal Hypocrisy Of Liberal Ireland

Coming back from my First Friday calls I was listening to Newstalk radio's lunchtime show.  One of the items concerned a poll on the upcoming Presidential election, one taken in the light of recent events surrounding Senator David Norris.  It seems, according to the poll, that while two thirds of those polled (from a sample of 800) agreed he did the right thing in stepping down, a majority would still have considered voting for him if he had decided to continue his campaign.  I almost drove the car into a ditch I was so furious.

Away on holiday I was getting regular updates regarding the Cloyne Report, I have blogged some reactions to that.  Then suddenly the updates changed to the David Norris affair where it was revealed that he had used his office as a Senator of the Republic to plead for clemency for his gay lover who was convicted of statutory rape.  More then came out  - how Norris, by his own admission, failed to be completely upfront with  Irish Immigration authorities who were investigating his lover's presence in the country.  He misled them in a manner which, if it concerned other people, he himself would call Jesuitical.  All this after another incident in which an interview he gave ten years ago was re-released into the public forum in which he expresses views on paedophilia which are, at the very least, deeply worrying.

Yet, unlike the bishops and priests who committed similar actions and covered up, rather than becoming the next pariah of the country, the media, the liberal luvvies and politicians are rushing to his defence.  The media are desperately trying to be balanced, and even trying to ignore the stories.  The gay lobby are howling "Homophobes" at all who are shocked at the senator's behaviour and some of them are vowing to get revenge on the young man who exposed the senator's letter pleading for clemency, which is not only appalling in its trivialising the crime of child abuse but is also an unbelievable piece of self aggrandisement on Norris's part.  Apparently, according to some journalists there are other skeletons in Norris's closet, one wonders if they will see the light of day?

I also notice that over at Wikipedia there is a debate going on on the discussion page of the article on Norris's former lover.  He is Ezra Nawi, a prominent pro-Palestinian activist. It seems some contributors have been trying to update the article on Nawi to include his conviction for statutory rape, but the editors/administrators won't allow it - they say there is no evidence.  If you go to the site you'll see that there is an effort to protect this man too by not including his misdemeanours.   Nawi himself believes Norris has been the victim of a dirty tricks campaign.

Well, rather than rant and give in to the devil's temptation to err against charity, I refer you to two excellent pieces in the newspapers today by two journalists who rise above the hypocrisy of the media in Ireland today: a criminal hypocrisy if you ask me.   John Waters has been on the radio the last few days and has spoken about this, his column in the Irish Times today sums up his excellent arguments.  David Quinn is the foremost defender of the Church, and sometimes its critic: when bishops fall silent and fail to teach and speak up, David does so.  His column in the Irish Independent sums up his position on the Norris case, as always excellently argued.

Of course all of this has happened before.  As liberal Ireland, politicians, media etc howl for Catholic blood, they also ignored the questionable actions of a gay poet on his jaunts overseas.  A young filmmaker exposed his particular little habits and it was she, not him, who was condemned in the press: another "homophobe" for the gay hysterics.

The fact that many in Ireland would still vote for Senator Norris sends a very clear message to those who work to prevent and expose child abuse in Ireland today and it is not a good message.  While liberal Ireland, and perhaps many in mainstream Ireland, attack the Church for its abysmal record in this regard - now, hopefully, a thing of the past, they are quite prepared to revise their values and expel their indignation when it comes to others. 

Child abuse is a serious problem in Ireland: we have not even scratched the surface - the abusers in the Church have been found as have their protectors - and thank God for that.  But the vast majority of abusers in Irish society, and their many protectors, have not been found yet and, I fear, if the Norris affair is anything to go by, they will never be found.  Why?  Because we all know them; they are everywhere, even in the upper echelons of Irish society.  Some are even paragons of secular virtue and liberal "holiness".  And by God, Ireland and her media will do everything to keep them safe: only the Church will be thrown to the wild animals (not the first time for that): scapegoat.

By the way, the very vocal, indignant Taoiseach has been very quiet on the whole Norris issue.  I wonder why?

UPDATE:   According to another article in the Irish Independent today, it seems Senator Norris has now been exposed as trying to rally support for his former lover from parliamentary colleagues without informing them of the man's criminal record.  See article here.